An Outline of a Criminal Case Law Research Coursework

An Outline of a Criminal Case
Student’s Name
Institutional Affiliation

An Outline of a Criminal Case
Introduction
Penn State University v. Jerry Sandusky was a controversial criminal case where the defendant was alleged to have molested teenagers who he mentored through his charity program, The Second Mile. The defendant was a renowned coach of Nittany Lions Football Club. The 68-year-old man got convicted of 45 counts of sexually molesting young boys in 2012. For 15 years that Sandusky served as a coach in Nittany Football Club, the person assaulted over ten young boys. The reason why the individual stayed for an extended duration without being revealed that he was a child molester is that he bribed his victims with expensive gifts, such as watches, golf clubs, and snowboards, to remain silent. One of the witnesses who made jurors shed tears was Mike McQueary. He testified how he saw the accused seducing a teenager in the shower. Notably, no motion was there for a venue change. The jurisdiction of the Centre County Court, Pennsylvania, was that the defendant was guilty of child molestation.
Specific Criminal Charges against Sandusky
Penn State University v. Jerry Sandusky was a state charge. The criminal statute, in this case, was endangering teenagers’ welfare. As such, the prosecutor was required to prove that Sandusky abused young boys sexually for a conviction to occur. The “lessor included” offense was seducing teenagers by giving them expensive gifts in exchange for sexual favors. Sandusky’s charges are a felony, and that is the reason why he was sentenced for over 30 years in jail (ABC News, 2012). The defendant committed a choate crime since he had perfected himself to abusing teenagers sexually. Inchoate offenses mean an attempt to commit a crime. The crime at hand was against an individual. If it were against a particular property, it would have involved vandalism, car theft, arson, burglary, shoplifting, or larceny. For the prosecutor to win the case, he or she must have gathered relevant evidence that Sandusky molested teenagers. Actus reus entails a constituent of a particular crime, while mens rea is the intention of participating in a crime. Mens rea and actus reus can occur concurrently. Sandusky committed a criminal offense. If it was a terrorist act, it must have involved violence against civilians, which is meant to achieve a specific religious or political goals.
Defenses
Karl Rominger and Joe Amendola are the defense attorneys who represented Sandusky during the criminal trial. Their specific moves were to show that the defendant was a close friend to all teenagers who he mentored and that he did not engage in sexual molestation. However, the evidence from the victims, particularly victim number four, made it clear that Sandusky seduced young boys while in the shower or at his house (Thompson, 2012). Some of the victims were intimidated so that they would remain silent while others were given expensive gifts. A justification defense involves the defendant’s acceptance that he or she did something wrong since committing a specific crime advances one’s social interests that outweigh its wrongfulness. On the contrary, excuse defense ...